Bailing out Underwater Mortgages

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Bailing out Underwater Mortgages SPEASchool of Public and Environmental Affairs Insights(SPEA) • Indiana University May 2010 Bailing Out Underwater Mortgages Summary The ongoing mortgage crisis has produced profound changes in the economic conditions of American families and destabilized global financial markets. Millions of homeowners are currently “underwater” on their mortgages – that is, they owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. The federal government has taken unprecedented steps to intervene in the crisis, both to reduce family hardship and to curb insolvency among financial institutions. The nearly trillion-dollar federal policy response to the crisis represents the broadest economic intervention since the Great Depression. Yet Ashlyn Aiko Nelson, as mortgage delinquencies and home foreclosures continue to rise, there is growing public Assistant Professor, concern that these interventions were insufficient and the end of the crisis is nowhere in School of Public and Environmental Affairs sight. [email protected] What are underwater mortgages, and why are they a public policy concern? Underwater homeowners are of particular concern because they are more likely to The views expressed are solely those of the default on their mortgages. First, households with mortgages worth more than their author and do not imply endorsement by homes are unable to refinance their way out of the high-cost mortgages they can no longer Indiana University or the School of Public and afford. Second, even households who could afford to continue paying their mortgage may Environmental Affairs. choose to strategically default, and walk away from their homes when there is no equity left to preserve (Geanakoplos and Koniak 2009; Foote et al. 2008). Some economists project that housing prices will continue to fall in 2010, increasing mortgage defaults by pushing more homeowners underwater and deepening the negative equity position for those already underwater (Christie 2010). At a micro level, mortgage defaults and home foreclosures exacerbate financial hardships for families, result in residential displacement and community instability, depress local housing prices, and increase the need for social services. At a macro level, mortgage defaults reduce solvency among financial institutions, constrain the availability of credit, and slow economic growth. The federal government now has the unenviable task of designing policies to keep underwater mortgages from undermining economic recovery. Peer Reviewers: Kim Rueben, The underwater mortgage crisis: How did it happen, Senior Research Associate, Tax Policy Center, and where are we now? Urban Institute and Ingrid Gould Ellen, In the first half of the last decade, homeownership opportunities expanded quickly Professor of Public Policy and Urban for several reasons: low interest rates, rapid housing price appreciation, expansionary Planning, NYU Wagner Graduate School of Public Service and Co-Director, Furman mortgage policies, growth in the secondary mortgage market, and improved access to credit Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy among traditionally underserved borrowers. Housing prices then declined after peaking in mid-2006, triggering a wave of defaults among borrowers. By others place the estimate as high as one in four (First American the end of 2009, American households had lost $7 trillion in real CoreLogic 2010; The Economist 2010). estate wealth, 13.6 percent of all U.S. mortgages were in a state of The problem is even worse among households that purchased delinquency, and nearly 1 in 20 borrowers – more than 5 million homes in the last five years, with 29 percent (nearly one in three households – were 90+ days delinquent and at risk of foreclosure households) underwater (Hagerty and Simon 2008). Among (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and Office of Thrift subprime borrowers who purchased a home in 2007, an estimated Supervision [OCC and OTS] 2010; Streitfeld 2010). 37 percent were in a negative equity position by mid-2009 (U.S. Historically, homeowners have faced foreclosure because they GAO 2009). And by the third quarter of 2009, 12.5 percent of experienced an income shock, such as job loss, which rendered borrowers (more than 10 million homeowners) were underwater them unable to continue making monthly mortgage payments. by more than 20 percent, with nearly half underwater by more What makes this housing crisis unique is that the unprecedented than 50 percent (Bernard 2010). foreclosure rates are driven by a more complicated mechanism. Through mid-2006, both rapid expansion in the subprime Negative equity and mortgage default mortgage market and declines in bank underwriting standards Homeowners with negative equity are more likely to default made mortgages accessible to many borrowers with weak credit on their mortgages – even in the absence of financial hardship histories and insufficient (or unverified) income and assets – because mortgage repayment does not increase home equity. (Bhardwaj and Sengupta 2008). Additionally, the new availability Although there are no systematic data on the proportion of of mortgage products – such as interest-only loans and 80/20 underwater mortgages in default, there is compelling evidence loans with no down payment combined with rapid housing that the two are strongly related. A recent study by First price appreciation to encourage increased debt among borrowers American CoreLogic (2010) finds that homeowners default on hoping to refinance into lower cost mortgages, once the home had their primary residential mortgages at the same rate as investors appreciated sufficiently or interest rates had dropped (Edmiston in rental properties, that is, once their homes are underwater by and Zalneraitis 2007). 25 percent or more, or the mortgage balance is $70,000 higher These mortgage market trends made borrowers particularly than the property value. An estimated 5-10 million homeowners vulnerable to interest rate increases and declining housing prices. In have reached this threshold (Bernard 2010; Streitfeld 2010). mid-2006, as housing prices began to decline amid rising interest Consultants at Oliver Wyman recently estimated that nearly rates and credit markets tightened, homeowners found themselves 17 percent of homeowners who defaulted in 2008 chose to do unable to refinance out of high-cost mortgages, especially if their so because their homes were underwater, rather than because of home was now worth less than their mortgage. The inability financial hardship (Streitfeld 2010). to refinance was particularly problematic for homeowners with Underwater mortgages in default resolve through one of variable-rate and interest-only mortgages,who could no longer three ways: afford the monthly payment after the mortgage reset at a higher • Mortgage cure (becoming current on the mortgage through rate. repayment or loan renegotiation), A sizable portion of mortgage defaults are among • (selling an underwater home in default at a loss, in underwater homeowners, and, as real estate prices continue to Short sale some cases with the lender’s consent to forgive the difference fall, homeowners are further underwater than ever. By the end of between the sale price and the mortgage amount), and 2006 approximately 7 percent of homeowners were underwater (Calculated Risk 2007); the figure reached 15-20 percent by 2008 • Foreclosure (property repossession by the lender). (Bernanke 2008; Hagerty and Simon 2008). The most recent In the case of short sale and foreclosure, borrowers with other estimates of underwater mortgages are staggering: Some claim assets may be held liable for loan amounts not covered by the that 11 million (one in five) U.S. households with mortgages are short sale or foreclosure. Short sale figures are one indicator of currently underwater (eCredit Daily 2010; Streitfeld 2010), while the pervasiveness of underwater mortgages in default. In January 2010, 15.9 percent of all home purchases resulted from short sales mortgage-backed securities – have done little to curb mortgage (Hoak 2010). Current estimates from real estate Website, Zillow. delinquencies. com, report that between 28.5 and 33 percent of homes sell at a The Obama Administration’s $275 billion Home Affordable loss, though loss sales are not always short sales (Zillow.com 2010; Modification Program (HAMP) is a more direct intervention, Haviv 2010). aimed at reducing foreclosures by providing incentives to lenders to make more affordable modifications to mortgages. The Who is underwater? HAMP program has drawn criticism for its stringent eligibility Homeowners relying either on subprime or reduced restrictions; narrow reach, with some estimating the program documentation mortgages (called “Alt-A,” for “Alternative-A assists fewer than 4 percent of borrowers who are more than 60 days paper”) are heavily exposed to mortgage defaults and negative delinquent; lengthy processing time; evidence of disparate impact, equity. The U.S. Government Accountability Office provides the with white HAMP-eligible borrowers more likely to receive following estimates of underwater mortgage status: loan modifications than minority HAMP-eligible borrowers; and • 63 and 57 percent of subprime and Alt-A borrowers, re-default rates of more than 50 percent among loans modified respectively, through HAMP and other loan servicer programs (Daly 2010; OCC and OTS 2010; National Community Reinvestment • 80 percent of nonprime borrowers with variable payment Coalition 2010). mortgages, which include interest-only loans, and
Recommended publications
  • From the American Dream to … Bailout America: How the Government
    From the American dream to … bailout America: How the government loosened credit standards and led to the mortgage meltdown Compiled by Edward Pinto, American Enterprise Institute In the early 1990s, Fannie Mae‘s CEO Jim Johnson developed a plan to protect Fannie‘s lucrative charter privileges bestowed by Congress. Ply Congress with copious amounts of affordable housing and Fannie‘s privileges would be secure. It required ―transforming the housing finance system‖ by drastically loosening of loan underwriting standards. Fannie garnered support from community advocacy groups like ACORN and members of Congress. In 1995 President Clinton formalized Fannie‘s plan into the National Homeownership Strategy. President Clinton stated it ―will not cost the taxpayers one extra cent.‖ From 1992 onward, ―skin in the game‖ was progressively eliminated from housing finance. And it worked – Fannie‘s supporters in and outside Congress successfully protected Fannie‘s (and Freddie‘s) charter privileges against all comers – until the American Dream became Bailout America. TIMELINE Credit loosening Warning 1991 HUD Commission complains ―Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac‘s underwriting standards are oriented towards ‗plain vanilla‘ mortgage‖ [Read More] 1991 Lenders will respond to the most conservative standards unless [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] are aggressive and convincing in their efforts to expand historically narrow underwriting [Read More] 1992 Countrywide and Fannie Mae join forces to originate ―flexibly underwritten loans‖ [Read More] 1992 Congress passes
    [Show full text]
  • Housing Finance Reform: Addressing a Growing Divide
    08 Housing finance reform: Addressing a growing divide Barclays examines how United States housing finance policies affect homeownership rates, finding that affordability targets can provide an effective counterbalance to rising income inequality. 2 Foreword More than a decade after the mortgage-focused government- sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed under conservatorship during the 2008 Financial Crisis, the debate about the appropriate role of the government in the housing market continues. 13 October 2020 Despite a raft of housing policies including subsidies, taxes We draw several lessons from these results. First, the and mortgage guarantees, the US has similar homeownership government can positively influence housing outcomes. levels to other developed countries that do not offer such Second, the distinct effect of the GSE affordability targets support. Critics of the current policies cite this as evidence suggests that other forms of support, such as the FHA, may that government intervention accomplishes little except create not be sufficient for low income and minority borrowers in distortions in the housing market, and argue for a sharply their current form. reduced role for government going forward. From a housing policy perspective, this does not translate Yet an important structural difference between the US and into support for the status quo. Many interventions in the other developed economies is the high, and rising, level housing market should be reviewed and may be unnecessary, of income inequality in the US. Our analysis indicates that and we cannot ignore the lessons from the financial crisis rising inequality exerts significant downwards pressure and resulting bailouts.
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Crisis of 2008 and the Philippine Policy Responses Global Financial Crisis
    Financial Crisis of 2008 and the Philippine Policy Responses Global Financial Crisis March 2008- Bear SfStearns fails July 2008 - Wall Street plunges FDIC bails out large US banks (IndyMac, Washington Mutual, Wachovia) Global Financial Crisis Sept 2008 - Lehman Brothers fails US government bails out Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG Global Financial Crisis Oct 2008 - Bailout of UK banks (Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS and Lloyds TSB) Nov to Dec 2008 - Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Sweden,Italy, Britain, Eurozone, Japan, Hongkong and the US in recession Policy Responses to Global Crisis 1. Central Bank (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Reclassification of Financial Assets from Held for Trading or Available for Sale to the Held-to- Maturity (HTM) or Liquidated Debt Securities classified as Loans categories. - Effective July 1. PliPolicy R esponses t o Gl GlblCiiobal Crisis Price of ROPs* from June ’08 to June ‘09 * Republic of the Philippines PliPolicy R esponses t o Gl GlblCiiobal Crisis Price of ROPs* from June ’08 to June ‘09 * Republic of the Philippines Policy Responses to Global Crisis • Amendment of PDIC Charter Oct 2008 - Bills filed in House of representatives to Dec 2008 and Senate to increase the Maximum Deposit Insurance Coverage (MDIC) Policy Responses to Global Crisis March 4, 2009 - Congress approved joint version of PDIC Charter amendments April 29, 2009 - Signed into law by the President of the Philippines June 1, 2009 - Charter Amendments took effect Policy Responses to Global Crisis Amendments to the PDIC Charter . Increase in the Maximum Deposit Insurance Coverage (MDIC) from P250,000 to P500,000 . Institutional Strengthening Measures 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Unemployment, Negative Equity, and Strategic Default
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Gerardi, Kristopher; Herkenhoff, Kyle F.; Ohanian, Lee E.; Willen, Paul S. Working Paper Can't pay or won't pay? Unemployment, negative equity, and strategic default Working Papers, No. 15-13 Provided in Cooperation with: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Suggested Citation: Gerardi, Kristopher; Herkenhoff, Kyle F.; Ohanian, Lee E.; Willen, Paul S. (2015) : Can't pay or won't pay? Unemployment, negative equity, and strategic default, Working Papers, No. 15-13, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Boston, MA This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/130700 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu No. 15-13 Can’t Pay or Won’t Pay? Unemployment, Negative Equity , and Strategic Default Kristopher Gerardi, Kyle F.
    [Show full text]
  • The Determinants of Attitudes Towards Strategic Default on Mortgages∗
    June 2011 The Determinants of Attitudes towards Strategic Default on Mortgages∗ Luigi Guiso European University Institute, EIEF, & CEPR Paola Sapienza Northwestern University, NBER, & CEPR Luigi Zingales University of Chicago, NBER, & CEPR Abstract We use survey data to measure households’ propensity to default on mortgages even if they can afford to pay them (strategic default) when the value of the mortgage exceeds the value of the house. The willingness to default increases both in the absolute and in the relative size of the home- equity shortfall. Our evidence suggests that this willingness is affected both by pecuniary and non- pecuniary factors, such as views about fairness and morality. We also find that exposure to other people who strategically defaulted increases the propensity to default strategically because it conveys information about the probability of being sued. ∗ An earlier version of this paper circulated with the title “Moral and Social Constraints to Strategic Default on Mortgages.” We would like to thank the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and Kellogg School of Management for financial support in establishing and maintaining the Chicago Booth Kellogg School Financial Trust Index. Luigi Guiso is grateful to PEGGED for financial support. We thank Campbell Harvey (editor), Amir Sufi, two anonymous referee and seminar participants at the University of Chicago and New York University for very useful suggestions, Gabriella Santangelo and Filippo Mezzanotti for excellent research assistantship, and Peggy Eppink for editorial help. We also thank Amit Seru for providing us with a time series of actual strategic default within his sample. 1 In 2009, for the first time since the Great Depression, millions of American households found themselves with a mortgage that exceeded the value of their home.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharp -V- Blank (HBOS) Judgment
    Neutral Citation Number: [2019] EWHC 3078 (Ch) Case Nos: HC-2014-000292 HC-2014-001010 HC-2014-001387 HC-2014-001388 HC-2014-001389 HC-2015-000103 HC-2015-000105 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 15/11/2019 Before: SIR ALASTAIR NORRIS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between: JOHN MICHAEL SHARP Claimants And the other Claimants listed in the GLO Register - and - (1) SIR MAURICE VICTOR BLANK Defendant (2) JOHN ERIC DANIELS (3) TIMOTHY TOOKEY (4) HELEN WEIR (5) GEORGE TRUETT TATE (6) LLOYDS BANKING GROUP PLC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Richard Hill QC, Sebastian Isaac, Jack Rivett and Lara Hassell-Hart (instructed by Harcus Sinclair UK Limited) for the Claimants Helen Davies QC, Tony Singla and Kyle Lawson (instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills LLP) for the Defendants Hearing dates: 17-20, 23-27, 30-31 October 2017; 1-2, 6-9, 13-17,20, 22-23, 27, 29-30 November 2017, 1, 11-15, 18-21 December 2017, 12, 16-19, 22-26, 29-31 January 2018, 1-2, 5- 6, 8, 28 February 2018, 1-2 and 5 March 2018 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Approved Judgment I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic. ............................. INDEX: The task in hand 1 The landscape in broad strokes 8 The claim in outline. 29 The legal basis for the claim 41 The factual witnesses. 43 The expert witnesses 59 The facts: the emerging financial
    [Show full text]
  • Housing and the Economy: Policies for Renovation
    Housing and the Economy: Policies for Renovation Chapter from forthcoming: Economic Policy Reforms 2011 Going for Growth Economic Policy Reforms 2011 Going for Growth © OECD 2011 PART II Chapter 4 Housing and the Economy: 1 Policies for Renovation 1 This chapter compares a number of housing policies for a range of OECD countries and concludes that badly-designed policies can have substantial negative effects on the economy, for instance by increasing the level and volatility of real house prices and preventing people from moving easily to follow employment opportunities. Some of these policies played an important role in triggering the recent financial and economic crisis and could also slow down the recovery. The chapter makes some recommendations for efficient and equitable housing policies that can also contribute to macroeconomic stability and growth. 3 II.4. HOUSING AND THE ECONOMY: POLICIES FOR RENOVATION Summary and conclusions Badly-designed housing policies played an important role in triggering the recent economic and financial crisis. This chapter investigates how housing policies should be designed to ensure adequate housing for citizens, support growth in long-term living standards and strengthen macroeconomic stability. Governments intervene in housing markets to enhance people’s housing opportunities and to ensure equitable access to housing. These interventions include fiscal measures, such as taxes and subsidies; the direct provision of social housing or rent allowances; and various regulations influencing the quantity, quality and price of housing. Housing policies also have a bearing on overall economic performance and living standards, in that they can influence how households use their savings as well as residential and labour mobility, which is crucial for reallocating workers to new jobs and geographical areas.
    [Show full text]
  • KPMG's European Central Bank Quarterly Update
    KPMG’s European Central Bank Quarterly Update September 2016 Welcome back from Summer holidays. With rest and SREP 2016 vs. SREP 2015 – how will they relaxation behind us now, KPMG's ECB Office looks forward to refocusing on the SSM priorities and key compare? regulatory issues facing banks across the Eurozone. Hot 4 November will mark the second anniversary of the off the press, the ECB has published its Draft Guidance to European Central Bank (ECB) as banking supervisor. This Banks on Non-Performing Loans. One interesting point is second year of supervision will end with a communication that all banks (even those with low NPLs) will be expected to the significant banks regarding the capital decision on to apply several chapters of the guidance, so it will have a the SSM common Supervisory Review and Evaluation widespread impact. The ECB will invite comment on the Process (SREP) methodology for the ongoing assessment Guidance in the coming months before the guidance goes of credit institutions’ risks, governance arrangements and into effect. KPMG’s ECB Office will soon publish an alert capital and liquidity situation, which have been carefully on this and the combined impact of this Guidance and the tailored to the Eurozone banks’ situations. The question on EBA report on NPLs. the mind of many in the banking sector is, “Is SREP 2016 going to be comparable to SREP 2015?” At the end of July the European Banking Authority released the results of the Stress Test 2016, which have revealed that the banking sector is more resilient than in 2014, but this is offset by high credit risk, poor profitability and other factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Fixed Income
    FX Market Headlines EUR rallies as bailout agreed Greece finally secures second bailout JPY weakens on inflation target BoE minutes indicate that more QE could be on the way EURCHF closes in on 1.20 floor Important Disclosure This document is based on information provided by Citigroup Investment Research, Citigroup Global Markets, Citigroup Global Citi analystsalth Management and Citigroup Alternative Investments. It is provided for your information only. It is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Information in this document has been prepared without taking account of the objectives, financial situation or needs of any particular investor. Accordingly, investors should, before acting on the information, consider its appropriateness, having regard to their objectives, financial situation and needs. Any decision to purchase securities mentioned herein should be made based on a review of your particular circumstances with your financial adviser. Investments referred to in this document are not recommendations of Citibank or its affiliates. Although information has been obtained from and is based upon sources that Citibank believes tobe reliable, we do not guarantee its accuracy and it may be incomplete and condensed. All opinions, projections and estimates constitute the judgment of the author as of the date of publication and are subject to ch ange without notice. Prices and availability of financial instruments also are subject to change without notice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The document is not to be construed as a solicitation or recommendation of investment advice. Subject to the nature and contents of the document, the investments described herein are subject to fluctuations in price and/or value and investors may get back less than originally invested.
    [Show full text]
  • Helping People Achieve Their Ambitions – in the Right Way
    Helping people achieve their ambitions – in the right way Barclays PLC Annual Report 2014 What is this report? The 2014 Annual Report includes a Strategic Report that summarises the key elements of the full report. The Strategic Report is in line with the regulations and best practice as advised by the Financial Reporting Council, and the Department of Business, Innovation & Skills. The design changes this year with increased infographics are intended to facilitate more effective communication with all our stakeholders, and to provide more concise and relevant narrative reports. These objectives are entirely in line with our aim to become more clear and transparent on our journey to be the ‘Go-To’ bank. We will continue to engage with stakeholders to identify ways in which we can further advance this agenda. Notes The term Barclays or Group refers to Barclays PLC together with its subsidiaries. Unless otherwise stated, the income statement analysis compares the year ended 31 December 2014 to the corresponding twelve months of 2013 and balance sheet analysis as at 31 December 2014 with comparatives relating to 31 December 2013. The abbreviations ‘£m’ and ‘£bn’ represent millions and thousands of millions of Pounds Sterling respectively; and the abbreviations ‘$m’ and ‘$bn’ represent millions and thousands of millions of US Dollars respectively. The strategic report The comparatives have been restated to reflect the implementation of the Group structure changes and the reallocation of elements of the Head An overview of our 2014 performance, a focus on our strategic direction, Office results under the revised business structure. These restatements were detailed in our announcement on 10 July 2014, accessible at barclays.com/ and a review of the businesses underpinning our strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Strategic Defaults
    MORGAN STANLEY RESEARCH Morgan Stanley & Co. Vishwanath Tirupattur Incorporated [email protected] +1 (212) 761 1043 Oliver Chang [email protected] +1 (415) 576 2395 James Egan [email protected] April 29, 2010 +1 (212) 761 4715 Securitized Credit Global ABS Market Insights Understanding Strategic Defaults Strategic Defaults are a Growing Concern: Strategic defaults have emerged as a key theme in the context of the ongoing foreclosure crisis in US housing. We define strategic defaults to be defaults on mortgage obligations by borrowers who are a) underwater on their mortgages and b) have other meaningful non-mortgage obligations on which they continue performing. We use borrower level data on the performance of mortgage and non-mortgage obligations to assess the magnitude of strategic defaults and analyze their evolution across vintage, Mark-to-Market LTV and borrower characteristics. Vintage, Credit Scores and Loan Balances Matter: The incidence of strategic defaults is higher at higher credit scores, more recent vintages and loans with large balances. At low levels of negative equity, strategic defaults are relatively low but they pick up steadily as the degree of negative equity increases. Collateral Implications of Strategic Defaults: Prime jumbo collateral is the most exposed collateral to potential strategic defaults. This is also the collateral type that benefits the least from loan modification efforts such as HAMP, and is least likely to be eligible for FHA refinancing. In contrast, the incidence of strategic defaults is significantly lower at the subprime end of the credit spectrum with lower credit scores and lower loan balances.
    [Show full text]
  • Did Repeal of Glass-Steagall for Citigroup Exacerbate the Crisis?
    ETHICS Curtis C. Verschoor, CMA, Editor Did Repeal of Glass-Steagall for Citigroup Exacerbate Freed from the restrictions of the Glass-Steagall Act, giant bank- the Crisis? holding companies appear to have been focused more on industry should be recognized as Citibank and Travelers Group. In meeting the expectations of Wall at least a quasi-public utility, exist- addition to the traditional bank- Street analysts than on protect- ing in large part for the benefit of ing services, this $140 billion ing depositors’ funds from risk. depositors who need to have con- umbrella encompassed brokerage, tinuing confidence that their investment banking, and several funds are safe. insurance companies, including mid the finger-pointing After the savings and loan disas- Travelers. Agoing on in regard to the cur- ter caused the previous banking More recently, urged on by for- rent banking crisis, it seems that debacle, the FDIC Improvement mer U.S. Treasury Secretary we may be forgetting who the real Act of 1991 mandated that insured Robert Rubin, Citigroup’s director culprits are. Should we blame the institutions employ adequate con- and chair of its Executive Com- bungling bureaucrats in Fannie trols to manage their risks in order mittee, Citi acquired heavy expo- Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal to maintain the safety and sound- sure to Collateralized Debt Oblig- Reserve, the Securities & Exchange ations (CDOs) based on subprime Commission (SEC), and the Trea- mortgages. By 2006, Citi had sury Department? Or are the regu- It will take a major become the second largest under- lators (perhaps they should be overhaul of business writer of CDOs.
    [Show full text]